Chevron v. NRDC (1984) and subsequent precedents held that courts should defer to agency interpretations of ambiguous statutes. This “Chevron Deference” has been a topic of great debate, with many calling for it to be overturned, while others argue it is a vital part of how Courts address the complexity of law and agency actions. Experts on both sides argue it has implications on the role of judges, judicial independence, separation of powers, stare decisis, governmental accountability, and the rule of law. In two cases this term (Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo and Relentless Inc. v. Department of Commerce) the Court will be asked whether that precedent should be overturned. Join us as a panel of experts give a preview of these two important cases in a discussion of what the Chevron doctrine has done, how these cases may affect it and the body of precedent surrounding it, and what they may mean moving forward. Featuring: Prof. John Duffy, Samuel H. McCoy II Professor of Law, University of Virginia School of Law Prof. Philip Hamburger, Maurice and Hilda Friedman Professor of Law, Columbia Law School; CEO, New Civil Liberties Alliance Prof. Kristin Hickman, Distinguished McKnight University Professor and Harlan Albert Rogers Professor in Law, University of Minnesota Law School (Moderator) Hon. Stephen Alexander Vaden, Judge, United States Court of International Trade

Ver todos los episodios